Jump to content


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


[FW:] Armotech hi-capa 5.1 review

Recommended Posts

orignally posted by jammed P90 :


er....because I didn't bring my digital camera with me, sorry :(

However, here is a compare between Taiwanese Hi-capa and the Marui Hi-capa made by a Taiwanese player.

Here it is!!


It's written in Chinese, but there are lots of close-up pictures. Enjoy :P





new to the business, made in china full metal pistol - ARMOTECH HI-CAPA5.1




introduction :


In the recent years, no matter japanese or taiwan makers who about to launch a new gun, theres always rumors everywhere. however before the lanuch of ARMOTECH HI-CAPA5.1 nothing was heard [perhaps i didnt search enough ?! ] it just jumped out all of a sudden. Apart from the material, almost every bit is a copy of the TM Hi-capa 5.1, no wonder why it's been kept in such a low profile ! Me, myself has one of those TM, isn't bad, but still think it's a little too plastic-ky. i would have believed TM trying to get itself into the japanese IPSC market, going head to head agains the WA. OK ! less BS-ing and have a closer look at the Full Metal Hi-capa 5.1




Appearance :


First glance on the Armotech Hi-capa 5.1 (from now on, short form as AT) looks metallic grey, filled itself with aggressive look. A bit like the WA 1911-M. Perhaps the metal itself giving it the cold feel and the soild-piece-look, unlike ABS model which needs special finishes to give it the fake metal look.


put it in the hand, wow, gosh, this is heavy ! once again the cold, metal feel shows itself. even without the mag, it's heavy enough as it is. the gun without the mag in feel rather heavy at the front, with the mag in, it feels just right. unlike other gun, which feels main weight it in the grip, this feels rather balanced.


on the left side of them slide ''OPS-M.R.P CAL.45'' is printed on as oppose to TM counterpart having it crafted in. it really doesnt matter which one really used, because, there is simply no real stell Hi-capa 5.1 anyway. Personally, i think the white printing is rather mart looking.




on the right side of the slide ''M.R.P CAL.45'' crafted on. the ARMOTECH logo on both side of the grip look rather fantasy in compared to the Japanese cunterpart !




at the right side of the frame, theres TM logo, and AT doesnt have anything




left side view of both guns, AT has already integrated rail




Magazine comparsion, top being TM, bottom being AT, clearly the two little circle marks are not there ont he AT model


just from the look, AT looks smoother than TM




there are words printed on the back of the TM mag, whihc is not present on the AT mag




Internals :




The stripping is exactly the same as the TM version.




barrel, recoil spring, recoil spring guide rod : top = AT, bottom = TM

the AT is using aluminium meterial and painted silver on top. although doesnt look as shinney as the TM's plastic with electrolysis, but surely can last longer. same to the guide rod. the spring themselves are exactly the same, thats why when it's being fired, the recoil feels a bit slow/weak.




close up to the finishes of the barrel and guide rod. the bad finishes of paint are obvious, and will be waiting to be improved




lower frame of the body. left = AT, right = TM, as you can see theres a hole on the TM for taking the rail, whihc is not present in the AT




the mould line on the AT (right) is more obvious than the TM counter part (left)




there are anti slip pattern on the TM trigger and none on the AT




hammer close up : just like finishes on the barrel, silver paint on the AT




which is which is obvous, right? ^^ the feel of the grip can hardly make a differnce, but the trigger makes the TM feels more wild than the AT.




TM being more detailed with engraved on the chamber cover




slides compare




TM has a white dot at the front sight as oppse to none on the AT


accordign to KIC info, theAT hi-capa weight 1127g and TM only weight 849g. i told them both apart and weight the bits and bobs~



slide with internals 282.5g 107.5g

barrel, with inner 141.8g 69.4g

bottom frame with grip 332.1g 324.3g

recoil rod 43.1g 35.2g


from the data, it's clear that the slide is being most differ part. then the barrel. the slide is heavier than the TM 2.63times ! being this heavy also explains why the recoil cycle is slow in compared to TM. and the vibration throughout the gun during the recoil is also much greater than the TM. [through 12KG of gas?] and under 12KG of gas the two hardly made any difference... (<-- that bit didnt make any sense to me -Tef-) From the look of it, this gun really doesnt suit the IPSC but more a wargame type of gun.


i saw this gun back in the gun show, it was one of the hotest items around plus the fact that my wife for the first time ever allowing me to buy this beauty. only let down was after a few mag something went wrong. the gas start leaking, took the gun apart, having it right next to the TM mag to have a contrast. right away, found something differnt...where is the rubber ring to the valve?!?!?! turnig the deks light one, look inside the chamber, suprise, suprise there it was, sitting inside the mag... quickly put it back in place, problem fixed and never come loose again... which means when it was produced, it wasn't fitted properly. some owners also report simialr problem with the hop-up rubber causing it to shoot side way, but then it was easy to fix. lets hope they bring up the standard and have a better quality control, with that in mind im sure they will be a very successful company.






having the gas chamber took apart might as well let you guys have a look


left to right : TM, AT, WA


As ''wolf'' said apart fromthe spring isn't strong enough causing the recoil cycle slower TM, it's also because they copy TM exactly meaning the amount of gas releases isnt enough to drive the slide too. For that, i have upgraded the valve and the recoil spring




i dont have any gas valve or recoil spring at the moment, but i do have a WA-SV reduce vibration strong spring set. so i installed it, and difference was clear, much fast then before, however, it was still miles off comparing to TM. Atferall it is a heavy numb of steel. No wonder why professional metal slide used in the IPSC are made out of the super light 7075 alloy !




spring installed




close up : such setup often used in the IPSC guns


written by Archy 2005/02/15



- Translated by Tef -

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I learn about the Armotech Hi-Capa, the happier I am with my TM. I'm gonna give this one a pass.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well first of all, I already upgraded my TM Hi-Capa with metal bits and pieces - which are surely much nicer than those die-cast taiwan parts.


And, a Hi-Capa lacking the trademark lightning-fast recoil because of a heavy slide isn't a proper Hi-Capa - it's more like something out of a WA factory (except with improved mechanical design). :P

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
If I could, I'd get one of these plus a HiCapa SAS kit.


The SAS kit wouldn't work with this gun. None of the Hi-Capa parts that attach using the Hi-Capa's rail mounting points will work. The Armotech has an integrated rail, instead of an optional one, so there is no place to mount them.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you're being a proper bugger tonight arn't you Utty..... :P


All I can go by is the pics so far unfortunately, but it looks good in most of them.


Just have to wait and see I suppose, but I'm reasonably sure it will be far superior than those plasticky old TM thingies................ :lol:

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites


Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.